Hillary Clinton Raises $143 Million For Campaign, Democratic Party In August
Hillary Clinton’s campaign had a very prosperous August:
Hillary Clinton raised $143 million in August, a total that includes her own campaign’s collections as well as money for joint fundraising committees with the national and state parties.
Her campaign hailed the monthly fundraising haul Thursday as its best of the campaign cycle. The Democratic nominee has more than $68 million on hand, and its average donation last month was about $50.
“Thanks to the 2.3 million people who have contributed to our campaign, we are heading into the final two months of the race with the resources we need to organize and mobilize millions of voters across the country,” Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook said in a statement.
The campaign said about $62 million of its total went directly to the campaign, while about $81 million was raised for the Democratic National Committee and state parties.
The Trump campaign has not released any fundraising numbers for the month yet, but it’s certain to be far less than this, and it’s unlikely that Trump will be investing personal funds like this into the campaign. Instead, he apparently is committed to the belief that holding the same kind of mass rallies he did during the primary campaign and relying on free media will be enough to propel him to victory. The Clinton campaign and the Democrats, meanwhile, while be using their fundraising advantage to fund television and radio ads, targeted direct mail, phone, and in-person voter contact efforts, and, of course, get out the vote efforts. We’ll see in the night of November 9th which campaign did it right, I suppose.
Only $143 million? With a haul like that she can only spend 3 million a day until election day. Hope she can scrape by.
I have said this before. These huge amounts of money can not be healthy for our system. Fundraising is a big part of every politician’s schedule. Asking people for tens of millions can’t be done without compromise. I testified at the state level on an issue that some citizens cared about and was opposed by a small moneyed group; before I even spoke I could see that the eyes and ears of my local representatives had been turned off.
We need to find ways of controlling the money in politics. As the sums involved get bigger, the number of people able to participate gets smaller. Government should not be an auction.
What about asking millions for tens of dollars?
Because with an average donation of $50 last month and 2.3 million overall donors, I’m not seeing the massive conflict of interest concerns. Let’s be real, my $100 isn’t buying me much (except the nice polo shirt that represents $45 of that…)
My $50/mo. to her campaign isn’t buying me anything other than the satisfaction that hopefully she will absolutely bury him on Nov. 8.
1. The average donation in August was $50.
2. The limits on donations are as follows: $2,700 to Clinton’s campaign, $33,400 to the DNC. Any donations over that have to be given to the State Parties – and those are capped based on the rules of that state. (Though the state parties can forward monies back to the DNC – but not Clinton – in unlimited amounts).
Yes, money in politics is corrupting but this concept that most of the money raised for a Presidential campaign is coming from a handful of big-wigs isn’t reality in today’s Democratic party. OFA blew that model out of the water with the internet-based donations and HFA has continued along that vein. You don’t get a $50 average unless there are lots and lots of small donors.
I have to say that there m,ay be a lot in what is being said about DT not being as wealthy as he makes out.
His “self funding” of his campaign seems to have been exploded as a myth; his seeming reliance on the GOP and his almost non existent spending on ads (relative to HC), lack of what you call a “ground game” …and his refusal to release any tax returns all seem to point to him being a tad strapped for cash
Did I miss the memo that we were no longer worried about “the corrosive power of big money in politics?”
I’m always the last to hear these things…
No, you have a reading comprehension problem. 🙂
There is nothing hypocritical about simultaneously believing that (a) there is too much money in politics, (b) money collected from small donations is preferable to large donations, (c) large donations from individuals to parties and/or campaigns that are publicly reported is far, far superior to secretive, hidden funding of 501(c)(4)s, and (d) that you can play by the current rules while working to improve the rules for the next cycle.